2017 Draft Thread

[Nick K]

Am I the only guy here who would rather have LaVine than the #3 pick in the draft?

Even if you don't like LaVine, using him to move up 3 spots is beyond assinine. That package you mentioned should be enough to get Jimmy Butler.

I couldn't agree more.

[Krapinsky]

Seems Kentucky bigs always underperform relative to NBA talent. I'm sure BAM will be a solid get for a team in the teens.

[fattymcgee]

Seems Kentucky bigs always underperform relative to NBA talent. I'm sure BAM will be a solid get for a team in the teens.

This has got to be saracasm.
KAT, The Brow, DMC.

[Krapinsky]

Seems Kentucky bigs always underperform relative to NBA talent. I'm sure BAM will be a solid get for a team in the teens.

This has got to be saracasm.
KAT, The Brow, DMC.

No. I think it's pretty clear they under performed while at Kentucky despite their lofty draft statuses.

[Klomp]

He doesn't seem to be projected anywhere near our pick. Draft Express has him going 32.

True. He was #8 on DX's mock a year ago though so perceptions change and swing back and forth.

Doesn't look like there's much swinging going on here. Looks like a steady decline.

[Klomp]

I'm not an Adebayo fan or a T-Wolves fan but just think he'd be a good fit for you.

Maybe he would be, but not at 7 and that's the only pick we have at this point.

[Nick K]

Do any of you think Zach or John Collins would be good picks if Isaacs isn't there?

[Klomp]

One thing I will say is these Finals tell me we still need maximum upside added to the roster if we can. Most of the guys we've been talking about have higher floors but lower ceilings.

[Biggsohnasty]

Good points. I'll disagree with some of it though not all.

If Fox is on the board somehow and the Wolves are picking, I'm taking him. Yeah you will catch flack for yet another point guard who doesn't shoot well but Fox is 19 and there is at least something to work with in that it's not entirely broken like Rubio's was.

Dennis Smith might not have done the best job leading NC State last season. He had his share of inconsistent moments - but I'd argue that almost every point guard had those but were better insulated with proper talent around them. If Smith struggled, his team got blown out. Fultz was in the same boat and let's not pretend Fultz was this spectacular leader for Washington - he put up huge numbers on an awful team. And I'm not holding the lack of winning against those guys. Blaming a freshman point guard for a team that has little talent and horrible coaching is an easy overreaction.

I totally disagree with your thought that you wouldn't give up on Dunn to draft Smith. Dunn showed he's got chops defensively but if he can't play offense, he can't be a starting point guard. To be competitive, you need more than a starting point guard. You need an upper-echelon starting point guard. Is Dunn going to go from borderline unplayable to upper-echelon? Nothing he showed as a rookie (23 years old at that) gave any indication that he's got that in him.

Smith isn't a slam dunk and sure there's some risk - as there is with drafting any 19-year-old - but if the Wolves are going to lock themselves to their roster by the end of this summer, I'd like to see them take a swing on a guy who in 3 years could be a rockstar. Don't take a guy who fits now as a nice role player because its convenient and we're in a hurry to win 45 games and get to the playoffs. Give me the guy who when he's 23, fits with a 26-year-old Wiggins and a 25-year-old Towns to form the next legit "Big 3"

I think if Smith is there, he's got the best chance to represent that. I don't know if Isaac does. He feels like a guy who will fit nicely into a team environment but he might tap out at "good quality role player" - and I wouldn't necessarily be upset about picking Isaac. I'd take him if those PGs are off the board. But Smith to me has as much upside as any of the PGs in this draft and had the team not drafted Dunn a year ago, it'd be a no-brainer. My perspective is that it should be a no-brainer anyway because Dunn can be viewed as a player for this team - but they shouldn't just assume he's the "point guard of the future"

But would you take that swing instead of having Rubio? Although Rubio is still a working progress when it comes to his jump shot, he did have the highest point differential pre post all-star (8.9 to 16). Most of it was a result of LaVine's injury, but we finally got to see what Rubio could do. He is better than most players that people in this forum want over him (namely Derrick Rose (ugh)). It'll be interesting to see if Rubio keeps shooting once LaVine comes back.

You're right that Smith would fit in the timeline with Wiggins and Towns. But that is dependent on A LOT of things (Wiggins shooting more 3s (even though he has improved every year), less DeRozan mid-range 2s and driving more to use his freakish athleticism; Towns' feet becoming MUCH faster so he can catch up on D and being more confident in his 3). Smith in my mind would want the ball more in his hands and that might hinder the development of our 2 budding superstars. And don't forget Smith tore his ACL just under 2 years ago (apparently he has an extra tendon just like AP so it healed faster?) The way he plays, obviously I don't want anyone hurt but it begs the question...

Dunn clearly knows he still has work to do but he should know his role as a defender off the bench. I think his offense can come around eventually if he is given the opportunity. He certainly is not the PG of the future (Tyus might be ahead on that front) but I think Dunn can have a steady role on this team.[/quote]

I'm still not convinced Rubio fixed his shot. He got hot for a good stretch but over the final month and a half he shot 42 percent from the field and 34 percent from 3. Not terrible numbers but he got hot the previous year for a while before cooling off too. I just don't think he's ever going to be a good shooter - I'm not asking for Curry here but I do worry that the more teams force him to shoot, more often than not he'll struggle. So I don't feel attached to him as the starter long term.

I'm also not as concerned about Smith needing the ball in his hands and that potentially hurting Wiggy/KAT. For one, he's 19. He's essentially a moldable piece of clay on some things and I think if you coach him a certain way, you can accentuate his playmaking while figuring out how to negate ball-stopping tendencies. Good coaches figure that out. Thibs is paid handsomely to do that so I'd trust that he could do it.

I also think people are being way to overcautious when it comes to the idea of adding players that might take shots from Wiggins and Towns. I don't want a team that requires greatness from 2 guys in order to win. If the team needs 35-40 shots per game from Wiggins and Towns, they will lose. Good teams have multiple guys that can create shots for themselves and their teammates. Thibs' Bulls teams relied entirely on Rose in the playoffs and their system in the regular season - neither of which are winning formulas when NBA teams try on defense.

I think Smith would give the team another potentially dynamic ball handler and if that means Wiggins and Towns have the ball a little less, good. Make them more efficient players because they don't feel as much offensive burden.

The ACL tear is certainly something to watch with Smith and I'm sure doctors will be all over making sure that's not going to be a huge issue. But I don't think ACL tears are what they were. Watch him play and it's very easy to forget that he tore it. He's extremely explosive and with it happening at such a young age, it's a factor, but not a big one.

And I agree that Dunn can still be a part of the team. He can be a valuable backup defensive-minded off-guard but I saw absolutely nothing that would make his presence on the team prevent me from drafting a player. No matter who the best player on the board is, Kris Dunn shouldn't factor into the drafting decision. He's got a long, long way to go. He showed good signs that he's got the defensive chops to stick. But I think you can make drafting a point guard work still with Rubio and Dunn. It takes a little creativity and projection - which isn't a typical fan's strength - but I don't think drafting a point guard means you have to overhaul everything about the current team.

[Klomp]

But would you take that swing instead of having Rubio? Although Rubio is still a working progress when it comes to his jump shot, he did have the highest point differential pre post all-star (8.9 to 16). Most of it was a result of LaVine's injury, but we finally got to see what Rubio could do. He is better than most players that people in this forum want over him (namely Derrick Rose (ugh)). It'll be interesting to see if Rubio keeps shooting once LaVine comes back.

I'm still not convinced Rubio fixed his shot. He got hot for a good stretch but over the final month and a half he shot 42 percent from the field and 34 percent from 3. Not terrible numbers but he got hot the previous year for a while before cooling off too. I just don't think he's ever going to be a good shooter - I'm not asking for Curry here but I do worry that the more teams force him to shoot, more often than not he'll struggle. So I don't feel attached to him as the starter long term.

There's so many mixed messages and rumors out there on Rubio, it's hard to know who or what to believe.

While Rubio did make some improvements, is it enough? Only looking at that scoring jump, it's great to see, but the 16 ppg he averaged after the all-star break was still worse than what 16 starting PGs averaged for the entire season. Not saying he's worse than all of them, but he does need to provide a scoring threat in order to stay an above-average starting PG. And I'm not entirely convinced he'll do that. He seems to be content barely shooting, unless it's a position where he's forced to pick up a greater scoring load. With three youngsters averaging what they do, I'm not sure we'll see his volume numbers stay where they were. Is that what this team needs at PG? It might be, but it might not.

Not giving up on him. But not calling him untouchable either. If value is there at No. 7, I'd have no issue taking a PG. Let the chips fall where they may.

[theGreatRC]

But would you take that swing instead of having Rubio? Although Rubio is still a working progress when it comes to his jump shot, he did have the highest point differential pre post all-star (8.9 to 16). Most of it was a result of LaVine's injury, but we finally got to see what Rubio could do. He is better than most players that people in this forum want over him (namely Derrick Rose (ugh)). It'll be interesting to see if Rubio keeps shooting once LaVine comes back.

I'm still not convinced Rubio fixed his shot. He got hot for a good stretch but over the final month and a half he shot 42 percent from the field and 34 percent from 3. Not terrible numbers but he got hot the previous year for a while before cooling off too. I just don't think he's ever going to be a good shooter - I'm not asking for Curry here but I do worry that the more teams force him to shoot, more often than not he'll struggle. So I don't feel attached to him as the starter long term.

There's so many mixed messages and rumors out there on Rubio, it's hard to know who or what to believe.

While Rubio did make some improvements, is it enough? Only looking at that scoring jump, it's great to see, but the 16 ppg he averaged after the all-star break was still worse than what 16 starting PGs averaged for the entire season. Not saying he's worse than all of them, but he does need to provide a scoring threat in order to stay an above-average starting PG. And I'm not entirely convinced he'll do that. He seems to be content barely shooting, unless it's a position where he's forced to pick up a greater scoring load. With three youngsters averaging what they do, I'm not sure we'll see his volume numbers stay where they were. Is that what this team needs at PG? It might be, but it might not.

Not giving up on him. But not calling him untouchable either. If value is there at No. 7, I'd have no issue taking a PG. Let the chips fall where they may.

16 starting PGs averaged more PPG than him, but how many averaged more assists/steals/rebounds. If you measure Ricky by his scoring, of course it's going to look ugly, but if he can get even just a decent jumper to go along with his great qualities as a PG, his overall impact could not be matched by many PGs in the league

[Klomp]

I think there are a lot of potential storylines and possible fits in the top 10 that will make draft night very interesting.

-The intrigue starts with Philadelphia. A number of different ways they could go.
-Sacramento could go a few ways with both of their picks. How comfortable are they with the PG depth? Is there someone they can't pass up at 5? I wouldn't rule out them taking Markkanen, even at 5. Isaac is in play too
-Not a lot of talk about No. 6, but I think that's a potential destination for Isaac. He and Gordon could make a potent forward duo.
-People wonder if Thibs talking about the PG depth could be a smokescreen. At first I thought that was crazy, but it makes sense. It creates some doubt if Sacramento was banking on a certain player falling to 10, maybe they'd have to take him at 5. And maybe that's what Thibs wants, so his true target falls to 7. Or maybe he doesn't even make a pick?
-Have seen a few names in connection with the Knicks at 8. While probably unpopular at first for the fans, I wonder if Ntilikina makes sense for that team. If they're still running triangle sets, he's got one of the better skill sets for that position of the PGs in this draft.

[Klomp]

16 starting PGs averaged more PPG than him, but how many averaged more assists/steals/rebounds. If you measure Ricky by his scoring, of course it's going to look ugly, but if he can get even just a decent jumper to go along with his great qualities as a PG, his overall impact could not be matched by many PGs in the league

23 PGs averaged more ppg than him for the season. The 16 was just after the all-star break, when he was playing out of his mind.

10 averaged more rebounds (Westbrook, Harden, Rondo, Payton, Paul, Lillard, Bledsoe, Lowry, Curry, Wall)
4 averaged more assists (Harden, Wall, Westbrook, Paul)
3 averaged more steals (Wall, Paul, Curry)

Even at his absolute best (scoring 16-20 ppg over an entire season), he probably wouldn't be considered above Harden, Westbrook, Curry, Wall, Irving, Lillard. So at best, he'd be maybe 7th best PG. And we're just talking about him trying to become at worst an average starting PG in the scoring department, something that hasn't happened in his 6 seasons so far. But arguably most people would probably take another 5 or so more PGs over him, keeping him in the average PG department.

I've started to think recently that Rubio was born in the wrong decade. Twenty years ago, he'd be a great starting PG. But the game has changed so much since the 90s, and it's very beneficial to have a PG who can take advantage of a good matchup if a post player gets switched on him, for example.

Scoring does matter. As Wolves fans, we've gotten so used to our starting PG be a scoring nonfactor, that we try to say guys like Westbrook, Harden, Curry, Wall, Irving, Lillard, etc. really aren't that good when that couldn't be further from the truth. We all act like we've secretly got this amazing talent but yet we're going on how many years without making the playoffs? It's like the game has passed us by and we're so stuck on what used to be that we aren't catching up with the times. If the trend continues, how much more can we take before guys just get sick of losing and start demanding trades? We need to win. What we've been doing hasn't worked. Maybe it's time to try something different.

[PharmD]

Those are all very good point guards you list but our offense was better than Lillard's or Westbrook's. It doesn't appear that Ricky is hurting our offense, quite the contrary.

You're right that it does hurt us that Ricky can't do much of anything when a big is switched onto him. But we can attack the other end of the switch, the guard trying to guard a post player.

[Klomp]

Those are all very good point guards you list but our offense was better than Lillard's or Westbrook's. It doesn't appear that Ricky is hurting our offense, quite the contrary.

I don't agree with that.

We may be 10th or whatever, but that does leave room to finish higher.

If we finish 10th with Rubio but could finish 5th with another PG, wouldn't that lead you to believe the better offense is the one that finished 5th?

[Klomp]

Those are all very good point guards you list but our offense was better than Lillard's or Westbrook's. It doesn't appear that Ricky is hurting our offense, quite the contrary.

I don't agree with that.

We may be 10th or whatever, but that does leave room to finish higher.

If we finish 10th with Rubio but could finish 5th with another PG, wouldn't that lead you to believe the better offense is the one that finished 5th?

[Klomp]

You're right that it does hurt us that Ricky can't do much of anything when a big is switched onto him. But we can attack the other end of the switch, the guard trying to guard a post player.

If we can get the ball to him. Do you remember how many times we yelled at the TV last year telling them to get the ball into the post?

[wildvikeswolves]

Do any of you think Zach or John Collins would be good picks if Isaacs isn't there?

I like Zach Collins and he's someone I can see Thibs liking a lot as well. 7 Footer that can provide some shot blocking and a better shooter then he is given credit for. Very mobile for his size so he could play either the 4 or 5 with Kat or Gorgui. Does need to get stronger though.

[PharmD]

Those are all very good point guards you list but our offense was better than Lillard's or Westbrook's. It doesn't appear that Ricky is hurting our offense, quite the contrary.

I don't agree with that.

We may be 10th or whatever, but that does leave room to finish higher.

If we finish 10th with Rubio but could finish 5th with another PG, wouldn't that lead you to believe the better offense is the one that finished 5th?

Well yes of course. I'm just saying that there's not any evidence that Ricky is bad for your offense and quite a bit that suggests he's very good for your offense.

[Krapinsky]

Do any of you think Zach or John Collins would be good picks if Isaacs isn't there?

John Collins is a dinosaur in the modern NBA. He can't stretch the floor, can't defend in space, and doesn't protect the rim. I probably wouldn't take him in the first round.


Zach Collins is a more intriguing long term prospect. He has shown range. He's shown some versatility defensively. He's scrappy. But he just looks like a kid right now and I have a hard time seeing him being an impact player during his 4-year rookie contract.